In Andean countries, Oxfam Partners Speak Out Against FTAs

Posted: 12 October 2006

The US-Peru Free Trade Agreement, the first Andean agreement that the US Congress will consider, could lead to agriculture dumping, unregulated foreign investment, and restricted access to medicines.

As part of its work to influence the rash of US-initiated Free Trade Agreements being negotiated around the world, Oxfam International’s partner organizations in the Andean region have tried to get governments to pay attention to their concerns.

In the case of Peru, Oxfam partners CONVEAGRO, Foro Salud, CooperAcción and APRODEH, created a campaign called “TLC Así No” or “FTA, Not This Way.” The partners have shared their messages with the press, built up grassroots efforts to activate civil society, and directly engaged with the government.

MEDIA: As part of the campaign, experts from the partner organizations regularly speak with national newspaper and television media, sharing their research on the proposed FTA. They describe how the agreement could lead to the US dumping its surplus agriculture crops in Peru, lowering prices for local producers. They explain how the FTA could expand monopolies on medicine prices through stricter intellectual property laws. And they point out that the FTA could lead to foreign investment that disrupts development efforts.
CIVIL SOCIETY: The partner organizations have gathered more than 50,000 signatures as part of a petition to get a referendum on the Peruvian FTA. But, despite the fact that Peruvian law allows for citizen-created legislative initiatives, the Congress refused to give citizens the referendum, and instead quickly approved the FTA. Oxfam partners said they wished that civil society had been consulted and better educated. But they recognize that it was a victory in and of itself to gather as many letters from citizens advocating for the FTA’s defeat. Oxfam America supporters showed their solidarity with Peruvians by sending more than 60,000 e-mails to members of the US Congress asking them to oppose the US-Peru FTA.
GOVERNMENT: As a result of the Peruvian partners’ advocacy work, the previous government recognized that the FTA would have negative impacts in agriculture. Accordingly, it established a compensation fund for farmers who it recognized are likely to be impacted by agricultural dumping. But our partners considered that the compensation scheme was woefully inadequate, both in terms of the products included and the budget set aside. The new Agriculture Minister has recognized that not all the vulnerable products have been included, and today is discussing which other products will be incorporated. At the same time, though, Oxfam’s partners estimate that the cost of compensating all the farmers for their anticipated losses is many times more than their government could ever afford and will ever allocate.

In addition to this work in the region, Oxfam partners recently brought their insights on the US-Peru FTA to Washington, DC, where they spoke directly with US Representatives and congressional staff about how the agreement could impact Peru. Oxfam partner organizations have used this kind of Capital Hill exchange to bring real life examples of how Free Trade Agreements with the US would impact the Dominican Republic, Central America, and Thailand.

The US Congress could bring the US-Peru FTA to a vote in November or December, following Congressional elections. But if public opposition is strong, they could decide to wait until next year.